Using the same poll as last time (STV poll published 28 March, to keep the second-half of this series consistent – the numbers are SNP & Lab – 35%, Con 14%, LD 8% and Green 5%) I’ve done the numbers for South Scotland which follow. Â I make the net change Labour gaining one seat from the Lib Dems, but its not as straightforward as simply Labour taking one seat from them, as you’ll see from the outline of the region below. Â Starting, as ever, with the constituencies, here we go:
Ayr – This has been Conservative held since a by-election in the early days of devolution. Â With a notional Tory majority of over 4,000, I can’t see that changing this time around. Con hold (John Scott – returning)
Cumnock & Doon Valley – Labour held since… well, forever. Â Cathy Jamieson departs to Westminster but leaves a healthy notional Labour majority of over 4,000 for her successor. Lab hold (Richard Leonard – new face)
Clydesdale – This is interesting, and the first of two fairly problematic seats. Â A few reasons. Â Karen Gillon is Labour’s incumbent MSP and has been since 1999. Â Aileen Campbell was elected for the SNP on the South of Scotland list in 2007 as Holyrood’s youngest MSP, so she is a well-kent face too. Â The notional majority is just 1,079. Â And the Lib Dems managed to bungle their nomination papers for the constituency and thus have no candidate. Â So we have some interesting things happening – not least 3,000-ish Lib Dem voters with no one to vote for. Â What will they do? Â Stay home? Â Just vote on the list? Â Try to vote tactically? Â On the last point, I’ve been trying to work out who would be best for them to vote tactically for – and to my mind, it doesn’t really matter, since I can’t see them being close enough to win a second list seat. Â So, that’s an interesting dynamic – and it will be worth watching for that reason. Â It could lead to a surprise SNP gain, but I’d be more inclined to think the Lib Dem votes will split fairly evenly, and thus leave this as a Lab hold (Karen Gillon – returning)
Dumfriesshire – Here’s a problem too. Â Similar to Eastwood, this is a notional Conservative seat now, with a majority of around 600. Â But Labour’s Elaine Murray, as the incumbent, won’t be a pushover here. Â I’m tempted to go with her, since she is a known quantity while, though the Conservative candidate is a local councillor, she’s probably not as well known across the constituency. Â Consistent with Labour’s policy of allowing their candidates to stand on the list when their seat has been substantially re-configured, Elaine Murray is relatively safe, and will return whether winning here or not. Â And whether she wins or not doesn’t make a difference to the overall outcome in South, since Labour & the Tories would simply switch a constituency for a regional seat. Â I’ll lean to notional Con hold (Gillian Dykes – new face) which sadly means no place in Holyrood for the impressive Derek Brownlee.
East Lothian – I was mocked a few weeks ago for suggesting Iain Gray might have a bit of trouble returning to Holyrood. Â It is unlikely, so this is probably a fairly safe Lab hold (Iain Gray -returning)
Ettrick, Roxburgh & Berwickshire – A Conservative gain from the Lib Dems in 2007, if opinion polls keep going the way it is unlikely that they’ll win it back, given the notional 1500 majority. Â Con hold (John Lamont – returning)
Galloway & West Dumfries – This is the Presiding Officer’s seat, and the PO himself is standing again (the first time this has happened in the devolution period) and back in the party fold. Â On the face of it, that dynamic makes this seat a little interesting – and certainly gives it a unique condition – but the fact that the former PO is defending a notional 2,500 majority suggests no change here. Â Con hold (Alex Fergusson – returning)
Kilmarnock & Irvine Valley – The shift of this seat from Central to South actually means the SNP lose out on a seat in Central Scotland, and probably means they hold steady  here… which means a net reduction of one seat overall.  What effect will that have on the final outcome?  They defend a 1,300 majority on the new boundaries, and look likely to hold it. SNP hold (Willie Coffey – returning)
Midlothian South, Tweeddale & Lauderdale – Lib Dems look away now. Â Christine Grahame has had three attempts to beat the Lib Dems here and hasn’t managed yet. Â However, this time conditions are most favourable – a nationally collapsing Lib Dem vote and new boundaries which firmly put this seat in the SNP column by over 1,200 votes. Â Jeremy Purvis is a formidable candidate – and its win or bust for him since he’s not on the South Scotland list. Â Unfortunately for him, it looks like bust, since I can’t see his personal vote overcoming the national slump and the 1,200 vote deficit. Â What works in his favour is that he has beaten Christine Grahame a couple of times before… but this one might be a step too far. SNP (notional) hold (Christine Grahame – returning)
So the constituency outcomes are:
Conservative – 4
Labour – 3
SNP – 2
D’Hondt calculations based on above would lead to seat allocation of:
Seat 1: SNP (Aileen Campbell – returning [#2 on SNP list but Christine Grahame elected in constituency])
Seat 2: Labour (Elaine Murray – returning)
Seat 3: SNP (Adam Ingram – returning [#3 on SNP list])
Seat 4: Lib Dem (Jim Hume – returning)
Seat 5: Labour (Claudia Beamish – new face)
Seat 6: SNP (Joan McAlpine – new face [#4 on SNP list)
Seat 7: Labour (Graeme Pearson – new face)
(Seat 8 would be the SNP’s Aileen McLeod, but the party are 2,000 votes behind the last seat – Labour & the SNP continue to alternate further down the list).
Total seats are:
Labour – 3 + 3 = 6 (5)
SNP –2 + 3 = 5 (5)
Conservative – 4 + 0 = 4 (4)
Lib Dem – 0 + 1 = 1 (2)
6 female to 10 male
11 returning to 5 new faces
Tactical Voting?
Opportunities are limited here. Â As mentioned before, I don’t think the Lib Dems are in with a shot of a second seat, so tactical voting for them is moot. Â And even if the split of seats among the other three parties is 3 each, or Lab 4-Con 3-SNP 2, or if the SNP were to lose Kilmarnock to Labour (thus 4-4-1) the overall outcome looks the same. Â A list seat compensates each of them for the loss of a constituency. Â Net overall outcome is the loss of a Lib Dem and the increase by one Labour MSP from the region.
Jeff does our last region (Glasgow) shortly, then we’ll pull all the results together and analyse what we have. Â As we get closer to the election we’ll, ahem, revise and refine some of our predictions and see where if we can work out how Scotland will look on May 6. Â Enjoy.
#1 by Doug Daniel on April 7, 2011 - 11:48 am
I’m glad Joan McAlpine will be getting in, even at 4th on the list. Bit of a shocker that both Tory and Lib Dem finance spokesmen are on such shaky ground – surely such (presumably) important figures in their respective parties should be in rock solid seats, or at the very least top of their lists just in case? I wouldn’t be too sorry about seeing Purvis going, but I think Brownlee’s departure would be a loss to Holyrood – he may be a Tory, but at least he makes his points well, and he was one of the few opposition MSPs to come out of the SVR furore with a bit of credibility.
I’ll never quite understand why some of these seats are in “South of Scotland”. The south makes me think of places like Galloway, Dumfries, Roxburgh, Galashiels and Melrose, whereas Kilmarnock, Ayr and Cumnock seem more like West/Central Scotland, and it seems fairly bizarre that a seat called “East Lothian” is not in the, erm, Lothians region. I know population plays a part in deciding these things, but surely it shouldn’t be to the detriment of geographical concerns?
A cynic might think these are just ways of exporting central belt Labour votes into other regions… Or maybe I should just stop moaning, as 5 SNP seats isn’t too bad.
Are the Greens not even getting a look in here?
#2 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 11:58 am
You raise several points here.
1) Jeremy Purvis didn’t stand for the list in 2007, making the case that if they didn’t want him in the constituency then he didn’t deserve to be in. Worked out okay for him then, but this time I doubt it will. It was his choice not to stand for a list seat, so we can’t blame the party. Similarly with Derek Brownlee – he IS actually top of the Tory South Scotland list, so the party have done their job, so to speak, in protecting his position. However, ironically he’d be the fall guy if the Tories have a good night. I’ve gone with the notional incumbent (Gillian Dykes) over the actual incumbent (Elaine Murray) in Dumfriesshire, but if that is reversed – he is back. So he’s hoping for a Labour gain there!
2) Each region has to have roughly the same amount of seats and there will always be some geographical head scratching going on. If they had just numbered the regions would that have been more acceptable? In practice, it doesn’t really make a lot of difference, since parties tend to divide up the region between their MSPs anyway, so for the SNP Aileen Campbell (if elected) would likely look after the seats in the West of the region and Joan McAlpine (for example) the East.
3) Labour have plenty to be annoyed about with the boundary changes – they lost a seat from Glasgow, which became an SNP seat in the NE (Angus North & Mearns). Its just in this instance it has worked out for them.
4) On the Greens, and on my figures, I make them well short of the 7th seat, barring an exceptional Green turnout and a reduction in the SNP/Labour vote.
#3 by Jeff on April 7, 2011 - 12:21 pm
I agree with your overall figures there Malc, and also agree that the Greens are a good bit off getting a seat (about 2,500 votes shy with the assumption of 6% national voteshare, and still behind Tories and Labour in the pecking order for who’d be next in line)
I don’t see the Conservatives winning Dumfriesshire though. I can understand your logic but I can well imagine the prospect of Derek Brownlee not getting back in may well net off against the consideration of Elaine Murray getting back in on the list anyway. The Conservative candidate would have to be very well liked before significant numbers of voters decide they desperately want both the Lab and Con candidate selected, I would have thought at least.
I guess it all depends on how well Annabel does between now and May but I’d almost say that if the Tories do well enough to win Dumfriesshire then they’ll also do well enough to win a second regional MSP, taking their tally to 5 from this one region.
Or am I being just a bit too biased towards fellow accountant Derek B here….!?
Speaking of which, I wouldn’t entirely rule out the Lib Dem vote collapsing behind Mr Brownlee in East Lothian for a real Tory surge, if he was challenging from second then you could have added SNP votes to that aswell. A split field should help Gray win through though but, well, you never know…..!
#4 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 12:42 pm
Haha. Yeah… or not. Winning Dumfriesshire doesn’t require a “Conservative surge” though. They just need to beat out Labour – and notionally, if both stay around their 2007 figure, they will do so. Do you think individual voters will comprehend the list ramifications of voting for the Tory here? I doubt it. And I can’t see them taking a list seat if they do.
That said, I’m not convinced either – figure its easier to go with “notional” scores on the doors in the absence of any concrete info to go on. Elaine Murray is relatively popular from what I hear though, and it wouldn’t be surprising if this ended up as a notional Labour gain – with the result that Derek Brownlee would return on the list.
As for East Lothian… I took plenty flak before for suggesting Gray might be in trouble. His performances since then have done little to make me think he is safe, and his 100% failure rate in trying to get re-elected to Holyrood (which I would love to see people make more of!) suggests a battle. But a 2,000 majority seems pretty safe – it’d be a massively bad night for him and Labour if that went.
#5 by Paul on April 7, 2011 - 2:26 pm
Might it be uncharitable of me to suggest that it would be a good night for Labour if he went ?
Some Labour supporters in East Lothian must be looking on in embarrassment and will save their Labour vote for the region?
#6 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 2:38 pm
Well, I’d agree on the good night/ bad night thing. Blessing in disguise is perhaps the better way of putting it… However, I still suspect that loyalty will see him comfortably returned.
#7 by Top Tory Aide on April 7, 2011 - 12:27 pm
I think Labour will take Kilmarnock quite comfortably. I imagine a majority of upwards of 4000. Labour have been absolutely knocking their pan in there and now have a very hard working local MP to aide them.
#8 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 12:35 pm
You think they’ll get a swing of 5000 votes? You might be right, but I’m conservative (small c!) when it comes to predictions. Either way, the net outcome doesn’t change – the SNP would get an extra list seat from Labour to compensate for the loss there.
#9 by Top Tory Aide on April 7, 2011 - 12:39 pm
Was merely passing over some info garnered from people in both camps…
#10 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 12:43 pm
Thanks. I think if Labour take it, it’ll be a majority in the hundreds rather than thousands… but I’ll remember you told me so if you are right!
#11 by Top Tory Aide on April 7, 2011 - 12:49 pm
If I’m wrong I’ll go into hiding for a bit…
For what it’s worth:
Ayr – Con hold
Cumnock & Doon Valley – Lab hold
Clydesdale – Lab hold
Dumfriesshire – Lab hold
East Lothian – Lab hold
Ettrick, Roxburgh & Berwickshire – Con hold
Galloway & West Dumfries – Con hold
Kilmarnock & Irvine Valley – Lab gain
Midlothian South, Tweeddale & Lauderdale – SNP gain
List wise I imagine that’d give SNP 4, Tory 1, Labour 1 and the Libs 1…
#12 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 12:56 pm
Technically, Dumfriesshire would be a “notional Lab GAIN” and Mid South, T&L would be a “notional SNP hold”. And your list would likely be right if the constituencies fell that way.
#13 by Top Tory Aide on April 7, 2011 - 1:05 pm
Political allegiance aside, am not convinced that two parties having in and around 50 seats each is actually that good for Parliament as an institution.
I expect the Lib Dems won’t even have enough MSPs to sit on every committee. Some committees may just be Labour MSPs and SNP MSPs…
#14 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 1:36 pm
Couldn’t agree more.
#15 by Top Tory Aide on April 7, 2011 - 1:50 pm
Type your comment here
It’s all rather frightening seeing areas such as central Scotland returning 6 or 7 constituency members as well as some list members. Guess it would well and truly be time to pack up and go home if Labour started getting list members in Glasgow and the West of Scotland!
#16 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 2:40 pm
Yep – and there’s a good chance we’d be moving towards the American model, with 2 dominant parties and representation divided between Labour and the SNP. Sure the Conservatives will take their 15% of the vote and 15 or so seats every time, but politics will be dominated by the Laabour-SNP discourse. That’s not really a fun political future – PR was supposed to move us away from 2 party politics. Instead, it may have entrenched it more deeply.
#17 by Daniel J on April 7, 2011 - 2:51 pm
Everything would appear to be pointing to this. Trying not to mention ‘new politics’ since that’s the topic of an essay I’m supposed to be writing, trying to stop the cynicism showing too much
I suppose independence would add some spice to it. Not sure if the SNP would remain as a cohesive force after a few elections.
#18 by Jeff on April 7, 2011 - 3:01 pm
I wouldn’t be too despondent. Isn’t there usually an uptick in ‘other parties’ just before polling day? It’s something the Lib Dems used to protest about and I seem to remember that it was jusitifiable.
It is inevitable that there will be a ‘big 2’ in any nation and, as has been pointed out, let’s just be glad that it isn’t a ‘big 1’. 100 SNP/Lab seats out of 129 would be disappointing though.
#19 by Daniel J on April 7, 2011 - 3:19 pm
You’re right about the supposed upping of smaller party support. Although I remember the SPICE report from 2007 Election noting that the polls actually overestimated support for Green/SSP/Sol and maybe the LDs.
We’ll need an increase in vote for other parties as the last 2 Scotsman, Times and Weber Shandwick(poll of polls) show 100+ Lab/SNP
#20 by Top Tory Aide on April 7, 2011 - 3:14 pm
Type your comment here
Also worth noting that polls often under-represent the Conservatives in Scotland. Ahead of last Holyrood election they had us at around 10 seats, if memory serves 8, but we got 17 in the end. (I should point out am not saying that this time I expect us to get 9 more than the 12 we are being predicted as getting but you know what I mean).
Only one poll counts 😉
#21 by Daniel J on April 7, 2011 - 4:09 pm
To which I direct you to the SPICE election report pg 36 😉
The poll of polls from April-Election day shows polls estimating just under 20 Tory MSPs. In fact the polls slightly exaggerated Conservative support when it came to the election!
(http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/research/briefings-07/SB07-21.pdf)
#22 by Top Tory Aide on April 7, 2011 - 4:26 pm
Type your comment here
Damn you and your evidence based retort!
#23 by James on April 7, 2011 - 8:33 pm
Sometimes I love our comments. This is one such.
#24 by mav on April 7, 2011 - 5:53 pm
out of interest, who is notionally 2nd in east lothian? We heard a lot last year that the SNP were confident of gaining it at westminster, but in the event a last ditch candidate change saved Labour – and the Tories were 2nd…
To me the situation highlights why I dislike the addl member vote system so much. The tories should be fighting hard to gain dumfrieshire, in actuality they are probably hoping to lose. While Labour may be hoping to lose dumfriesshire, to eliminate brownlee, given that elaine murray is safe either way. I suspect voters there are in for a very quiet election.
Of course, what they should have done is made brownlee the dumfriesshire candidate.
My second point. Once you’ve done all the regions, any chance of a list of the MSP’s we can’t avoid, no matter how we vote? Eg sturgeon, elaine murray, all need not be campaigning.
#25 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 6:46 pm
East Lothian notional result 2007:
Lab 10,822
SNP 8,713
Con 6,032
LD 5,822
Notional Majority – 2,109
Guess the anti-Labour vote (if there is one) is split three ways.
I think you are spot on on the Derek Brownlee/ Tory/ Dumfriesshire situation. It is a problem of the system.
We’re finishing up the regions tomorrow with Glasgow… then we’re likely to do one pulling all the numbers together. But your suggestion is one worth pursuing – and indeed one I’ll have a think about. Cheers.
#26 by C on April 7, 2011 - 6:10 pm
Labour won’t gain Kilmarnock (…). The only labour leaflet we’ve had came today, having had five from the SNP already!
#27 by Colin on April 7, 2011 - 6:55 pm
I’m just hoping that Elaine Murray loses her seat. I feel kind of dirty hoping for a Tory win there, but she is absolutely awful and deserves to go.
#28 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 7:01 pm
Yeah but if she loses the constituency, she is top of the Labour list in South Scotland, and all-but-guaranteed to return to Holyrood, especially since Labour will get 3 list seats on these figures.
#29 by Colin on April 7, 2011 - 7:06 pm
Ah! I didn’t realise labour put candidates on the list too, I thought they had a policy against that?
Anyway, my dislike of her is for personal reasons (which I wont go into in respect to the parties involved) suffice to say, she is one of the rudest people I have ever met and I’m not just sayin that like a figure of speech that people often use in everyday talk.
I think I agree with your analysis, however it will be a bit of a shock to see Purves go. Do you think it likely that the SNP could get an extra 2,000 votes on the list and get the final seat there, say, if the Liberal Democrat vote in the south tips slightly in their favour?
#30 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 7:12 pm
Generally that is Labour’s policy. However, this time around they gave dispensation to candidates who held seats which had considerable boundary changes leading to them being notionally held by other parties. Elaine Murray & Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) are the main beneficiaries though Ken Macintosh was offered the chance in Eastwood and decided (like Jeremy Purvis did) that it was the constituency or bust.
I think it unlikely that the latter case happens, to be honest. I think the Lib Dem vote, if it does collapse, splits fairly evenly – its not like they have much love of either the SNP or Labour. In my view, if Lib Dem voters are inclined to not vote Lib Dem this time, they are more likely to stay home than vote SNP/ Labour. And 2,000 is a bit of a leap.
#31 by Chris on April 7, 2011 - 6:57 pm
At least in the American model there is some obvious difference between Republicans and Democrats. I worry more that we are heading for a Fianna Fail / Fine Gael model. The parallels are quite alarming: a once impregnable party loses its way due to a mixture of jobsworthiness and nepotism; whereas a formerly centre-right rural party with an enigmatic nationalist leader shifts leftwards on a platform of competence and compromise over independence.
Let’s not get too far with the Alex Salmond/Michael Collins comparison!
However in the end we have 2 parties that no one can really tell the political difference between. The roots of the fissure being on a constitutional question that most of the public aren’t bothered about.
#32 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 7:02 pm
Again – agree with most of that. Man, we’re a consensual bunch when we speak sense!
#33 by James on April 7, 2011 - 7:53 pm
This.
#34 by Stuart on April 7, 2011 - 9:03 pm
Here Here! Comment of the election.
#35 by Chris on April 7, 2011 - 8:30 pm
Interesting about Kilmarnock. In 2005 UK GE Labour won Kilmarnock and bits by 8,000 before losing Kilmarnock and other bits by 2,000 in the 2007 Scottish Election. In 2010 Labour wins the GE seat by 12,000 on a static SNP vote. This makes me think that there could be two factors at play.
1. There is clearly a general rise in the underlying SNP support, but as usual spread too thinly to win FPTP seats but compensated by sweeping up the list seats.
2. In some seats Labour were punished exceptionally in 2007 – areas with students or soldiers dying in Iraq.
As the shift in votes between 2005 and 2010 shows Labour’s punishment over Iraq and Student fees receded in seats like Glasgow North (and Durham and Oxford East in England) where a uniform swing would have seen these seats lost or very vulnerable.
So I expect that the uniform swing again won’t apply and that seats where Labour did exceptionallly badly (Stirling, Kimarnock, etc) are actually Labour’s to defend notionally on a more uniform SNP rise.
This of course leaves the SNP in the same frustrating place of being runners up in Urban and Central Scotland and winners in rural and Northern Scotland.
#36 by Malc on April 7, 2011 - 9:36 pm
This is something that is difficult to quantify so probably not something we can fire into the predictor. But useful information, and stuff we’ll probably have to think about. Thanks for pointing it out.
#37 by Top Tory Aide on April 8, 2011 - 8:09 am
Type your comment here
To be fair, I can’t see any scenario where Labour want to lose Dumfriesshire…
#38 by Malc on April 8, 2011 - 8:17 am
That isn’t my quote. I never said that I thought Labour would hope to lose it.
#39 by Top Tory Aide on April 8, 2011 - 8:23 am
Type your comment here
I was trying to quote comment 29… How odd
#40 by Malc on April 8, 2011 - 8:27 am
Ah. That explains it. Don’t worry about it. A flaw in the blog DNA… and one that none of us are smart enough to fix!
#41 by Top Tory Aide on April 8, 2011 - 8:44 am
Type your comment here
Ha! You can take my point though, there is no way that the Labour party is sitting thinking of taking the calculated risk of losing Dumfresshire just to rid Parliament of Brownlee especially as Labour looks to get around 50 seats anyway…
#42 by Malc on April 8, 2011 - 9:07 am
I agree. Holyrood also needs all the good politicians it gets, and though they might get a pasting at Derek Brownlee’s hands on occasion, he is a politician who is good for the chamber and would be a massive miss if he wasn’t re-elected – even Labour would recognise that. If my Nat friends will permit me the comparison, I see him as a similar type of politician to Andrew Wilson who lost his seat in 2003… and has since found employment elsewhere – and I doubt whether he will be back. It’d be a shame if Derek Brownlee ended up in the same boat.
#43 by Keith Roberts on April 8, 2011 - 10:00 am
I’m not so convinced that Karen Gillon will hang on to Clydesdale. There’s a local issue, the Dovesdale Incinerator in which the fragrant Ms Gillon and her election agent are tarnished by the planning decision of the local authority. Aileen Campbell has the advantage of the ‘kissing babies’ factor. showing off her new one at every opportunity. But mainly though, as you rightly mention, the whereabouts for the LibDems with no candidate of their own. With Iain Gray having a car crash at every turn I’m not so sure that those votes will be shared evenly. I see an SNP gain, with good strong local campaigning.
#44 by Top Tory Aide on April 8, 2011 - 10:06 am
Type your comment here
It’s all down to where the Liberal vote goes I guess. Be quite a remarkable turn of fortune if Labour were to lose that seat that’s for sure. Not saying it won’t happen just saying that that’d be massive
#45 by Malc on April 8, 2011 - 10:20 am
Quite. I had heard about the incinerator issue. And I think the Lib Dem vote is a key factor as well. Who will they vote for?! Saying that, I got burned pretty badly last year predicting seats changing hands when none did – when it comes to it, our electorate can be quite (small “c”) conservative when it comes to changing their allegiances… so when I’ve had a dilemma I’ve tended to go with the incumbent. But it is certainly one to watch out for on election night.
#46 by Allan Wilson on April 8, 2011 - 10:38 am
On Midlothian South,
Firstly what a ridiculous constituency (in my opinion being a borderer) the matching of Borders towns with mining towns from the Lothians where the needs are completely different.
Anyway voting intentions – the Lib Dem vote is mainly concentrated in the central Borders (Lauderdale inc. Galashiels) and for the redistribution of that vote (assuming the collapse) – this will not go to Labour – the only time that Labour has polled well here was in 1997 before falling back to nominal figures. I would expect an even redistribution between SNP & Tory for the Borders Lib Dem voters thus the Torys would gain most votes from here. Peebles (tweeddale) area is a mainly tory voting area with LDs coming in second, would expect that vote to go Tory. That leaves Midlothian and the staunch Labour voting areas, so in this seat if Christine Graham wins it is going to come down to how close in each of the 3 distinctive areas she finishes 2nd.
Interesting seat as I can see an SNP win but the demographics of the seat mean that if the seat were split into the 3 distinct parts, none of the 3 areas actually would vote for the SNP first.
#47 by Malc on April 8, 2011 - 10:47 am
That’s an interesting analysis. She must get votes from somewhere though, given the areas within the seat would have returned her relatively comfortably in 2007 had the boundaries been the same then. Again – it’ll be interesting to watch it on election night.
#48 by Danny1995 on April 8, 2011 - 1:23 pm
Ayr: CON hold(John Scott)
C&DV: LAB hold(Richard Leonard)
Clydesdale: LAB hold(Karen Gillon)
Dumfriesshire: LAB “gain”(Elaine Murray)
East Lothian: LAB hold(Iain Gray)
E, R & B: CON hold (John Lamont)
G & WD: CON hold(Alex Fergusson)
K & IV: LAB gain(Matt McLaughlin)
MS, T & L: SNP “hold” (Christine Graham)
list:
4 SNP, 1 LAB, 1 CON, 1 LD
overall:
6LAB, 5 SNP, 4 CON, 1 LD
Running total(7 of 8 regions predicted)
LAB – 44
SNP – 41
CON – 14
LD – 8
GRN – 1
IND – 1